Katja Kumpulainen

Making the Qt brand remarkable

Published Wednesday April 13th, 2016
49 Comments on Making the Qt brand remarkable
Posted in Biz Circuit

In the process of demerger from Digia to become our own entity, The Qt Company is taking advantage of the momentum to embrace a brand renewal as it is increasingly important for Qt to strengthen its brand by capturing the significance of what we’re all about.

We’re aiming for a contemporary visual identity that expresses our solid position as the leading independent technology for cross-platform development. Qt is about powerful blocks of code that run anywhere on any device, on any operating system at any time. We built a visual system that reflects the same principles – a system that is based on one simple block that can conveniently be expanded into various layouts in a wide range of formats. The Qt logo has now evolved into solid sharp lines, revealing an intense energetic green. We welcome you to visit www.qt.io to see how we have already started to implement the new look and feel. For those of you needing usage guidelines please visit http://brand.qt.io/ or take look at the video about the brand change.

Do you like this? Share it
Share on LinkedInGoogle+Share on FacebookTweet about this on Twitter

Posted in Biz Circuit

49 comments

Konstantin says:

One more “flatland devotee”… Could you please remind me, do we still live in 3-dimensional space? Looks less and less likely. Why all the projects, all the companies are so happily running to 2-dimensional land? As if everybody is afraid to have a different, original opinion. “Everybody does it, so me must do it too, no matter what!” Now one more really cool logo is gone, leaving us with squashed, undistinguished, totally unrealistic picture.

Good bye, old Qt logo, I will remember you true face!

John says:

I have to say I am not thrilled by this new “design”. The old logo is better, maybe just remove the perspective.

All in all, I see a lot of efforts spent in the wrong directions. Qt has thousands of critical bugs open, keeps slipping further and further behind schedule and becomes monstrously bloated with legacy and redundancy code. Maybe focus on those things first…

Maybe focus on making the product remarkable and stop obsessing over rebranding and such. A remarkable product will make it own brand, and no amount of rebranding will fix a product in spiraling decline.

Stepan Andreenko says:

I would second this. Older QT Creator versions are less buggy than 3.6 and many bugs remain even in “reported” state.

Kai Koehne Kai Koehne says:

I can assure you no Qt Creator developers where forced to work on the new brand instead of fixing bugs 🙂 It’s different people and different departments …

fritz says:

Yes, but resources a limited. Bring in more programmers and reduce the marketing department.

Kai Koehne Kai Koehne says:

That’s IMO too simplistic. For a healthy company you need R&D _and_ sales _and_ marketing, and a few others.

fritz says:

Yes, that was a bit too simplicistic. But it also depends on the type of product or service you are selling and who your customers are. If you cater to developers, let the music do the talking.
That said, I’m pretty happy with Qt, no need to sell it to me.

Yuri Alexandrov says:

I agree 100% that for a product such QT only brand which matter is stability, efficiency, performace..
It doesn’t matter which logo latest Qt Creator has as long as it doesnt work properly.
Personally I liked previous logo much more, new one looks just a wierd SIM Card.

@Yuri: I can assure you that we are working hard also for the stability, efficiency and performance. Qt 5.5 and 5.6 both had a focus into stability and with Qt 5.6 we announced the first long-term supported Qt 5 version. We are also continuously improving performance and resource efficiency, in addition to creating new functionality. We also have an open governance model that allows anyone to help in this by contributing to Qt and by reporting bugs.

Yuri Alexandrov says:

Thank you for your answer. I absolutely do beleive that you guys are really busy and looking on a list of open bugs I have no doubts about that. But what I want to say is that from my point of view there is a lack of balance between implementing new features and support of a current versions/customers.
I am an Enterprise license owner and for almost a year I have reported I think about 30-40 incidents/bugs.. most of them went to the bugs but I think only one or two of them were fixed.
Considering how much I paid.. honestly I am not sure that I am happy knowing that my money are spend on a new logo rather then on a fixing something..

Konstantin says:

I agree with you. I have enterprise license too. I reported any critical bugs but it not fixed for years. And no priority for paid users bugs. In this year I really think about what I pay.

Kai Koehne Kai Koehne says:

I can assure you that bugs from commercial customers get some priority from internal developers.

Yuri Alexandrov says:

I guess then ‘some’ is not what is expected =)

Actually as a constructive proposal – make something as ‘donate to fix’ – I mean look – let’s say there is a bug which I reported, I even found where its wrong

https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-50925

it’s probably not really important from logic point of view, but it looks absolutely hopeless then you deliver an application to the end user with a menu working so slow. Then I have several options – I can either start to create my own menu infrastructure which takes time and money, or I can hire somebody to fix or I can donate to developer who is responsible for this component to ‘boost’ fixing priority =)

Same with Qt Quick Controls 1 – as I understand from support – you don’t have time/resources to fix them to support hidpi, and it will be addressed in QtLabs/Qt Quick Controls 2 – but how on Earth you propose to live delivering commercial applications which we (as developers) have to do to earn money to pay you =) 5.6.* is totally broken release, we spent 2-3 months on it an has to roll back as it’s absolutely broken from QML hidpi point of view.. Also there are absolutely obvious bugs like:

https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-52365

How should I explain to my customer that text disappearing is ‘Somewhat important’ with P3?

So, we rollback to 5.5..

And this is just a joke:

https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-52410

Promising that something which present in _every_ popular parser will be available in 5.7!!! where you are saying that 5.6 will be LTS.. How you guys see planning for your own customers, we are paying you not just for fun to get a nice toolkit, we have to live with that, deliver things..

@Yuri: I checked the issues you mentioned and 2/3 are fixed in Qt 5.7. We do of course fix bugs also in the patch level releases, but if the fix happens to be new functionality it needs to go into the next minor release of Qt. Overall Qt 5.6 LTS is a solid and usable product already now with just the .0 release out and will continue to receive bugfixes and improvements throughout multiple patch releases in the next 3 years. But in case you need new functionality, it is always only available either with a new version of Qt, or via backporting from the new version to your custom build of the older Qt version.

Francesc says:

I think that in addition to the new brand and this new visual identity, it’s necessary to be involved where the users are.

The difference between other companies, money beyond, is that they are involved in the university and in high school. People come out from there with a base knowledge in C# or Java. But they even don’t know that Qt exists!

If we want to extend the use of Qt, it is necessary to let them know how amazing it is by teaching the people before they are involved in the professional world.

But not only them, we also need to teach teachers, so they can see the benefits and they can share with their colleagues.

Tham says:

I think this is hard to change. Qt is a c++ library, it makes the life of c++ developers much easier, but Qt cannot help those developers who do not familiar with c++ from the beginning. Today there are still a lot of people think c#, java are much easier to teach/use than c++., if you want to make more students/teachers favor about Qt, you need to make them think “c++ is easy to teach and learn”, but not “Qt is amazing”. No matter how amazing Qt is, if those students/teachers cannot learn c++ effectively, Qt means nothing for them

Spencer Schumann says:

Qt isn’t just C++ anymore. With Qt Quick, you can write most or all of your application in JavaScript and QML. Despite its quirks, JavaScript’s popularity is surging.

closedev says:

Going the JavaScript route loses all the performance advantage of native compiled code. You may consider that an advantage, I do not.

Tham says:

c++ community try to make c++ become easier to learn, c++11 is a good step. But there are still a long way to go.

IMHO, c++ is not that difficult to use or learn, but you have to change the way of learning/using c++. Today there are still many teachers/developers treat c++ as “c with classes”, they do not know or refuse to learn what is RAII, template, basic meta programming, adopt stl, their codes still looks like legacy c codes., no wonder why their productivity are so bad.

Would you expect someone still writing “c with classes” can use Qt effective?I wonder

Tham says:

One thing I forgot to mention, Qt is amazing on desktops and embedded linux, but not so good on mobile. Qt5 still do not support

1 : advertisement
2 : notification
3 : facebook
4 : analytics(ex : google, flurry)
5 : more build in widgets, this include QWidget and QQuick2.

Who are your customers?app consumers?Apparently no, they are developers.We developers do not care about your logo is 3D,2D or 100D, we want more useful features.Rather than rebranding your mark, please spend more resource to heard the voices of those developers, what are they want?Ask about your brilliant developers, what are the most essential features needed by Qt5?

Nicola De Filippo says:

+1

Tham says:

If you want to know what are the developers needed most, look at the plug-in of v-play. They keep their best to implement the most important features Qt5 still lacking. Put yourself in the shoes of the developers, what makes you more excited?

case A : The logo change, it become more beautiful
case B : We offer you lot of useful features like v-play provided, now you do not need to scratch your head, struggle how to implement them on different platform anymore and save me a lot of times.

ps : Even people do not able to change their image about c++, there are Qt jambi and PyQt out there.

Tham says:

Think about another situation. What would you advertise Qt to the developers.

“Qt can develop cross platform app, write once compile anywhere, it do not support critical features of mobile like advertisement, analytics, facebook integration, notification and so on, but we do have a brand new 2D logo”.

Or

“Qt can develop cross platform app, write once compile anywhere, it is a very mature library on desktop and support every critical features of mobile, like advertisement, analytics, facebook integration, notification and so on”.

Which one are more useful and give developers better image, greater interest on Qt tech? If you, Qt company believe we developers care about your logo more than useful features(and stable software), this is a serious problem, because you already missed your way.

Hired more developers, heard the voices of your developers and the voices of the community, your customers.Don’t close your door and imagine a brand new logo could change things, developers do not care about your logo, they care about the quality of the libraries, which means stability, more features, ease to use API and performance.Only developers know what developers needed most, not PR

Tham says:

If a small company like v-play able to provide the developers so many useful features of mobile they want to have and keep asking on Qt company, how could a much bigger, richer company like Qt cannot make it? Again, please do not shut your door again, open your mind and heard the voices of the developers, what are we(developers) really need.

If v-play can do it, I believe Qt company can make it even better. Before you change your brand, you need to change your development strategy.

Ilya says:

Great work! Qt is forever young!

Leandro says:

We need a built-in widget collection for mobile devices, similar to V-Play lib, much than a Qt rebrand imho.

gyll says:

Great! Now you have a logo scheduled for mandatory replacement in a couple of years when the flatland mania will fade into oblivion. Can’t believe how short-minded these PR people can be.

John says:

I can totally see it – the PR department took the old logo, made it worse, and now everyone is patting everyone else on the shoulder, congratulating each other “we did a great job”…

Worst part is when companies lean heavily on marketing, that’s usually because management knows the product ain’t good and ain’t getting better, so they try to “compensate” with “pimping” it. Little do they know, most developers are pragmatic people, and as such they don’t give a broken cent about marketing…

Philippe says:

A bit trop flashy. Hard for the eyes.

Alex says:

same. Look like a logo done in 5s by a random guy in the street.

Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer says:

Sorry, I don’t like it.

Mark Liversedge says:

I like it. Would love to see a QT visual that spans all OS and devices.

Rather than make my app look native to each I’ve ended up making compromises to make it look the same on all.

A QT visual that wasn’t jarring in the native visual would be a real win.

Ruslan says:

Please, do not use this color #3bd23d any more.
Use this #80C342

Matthieu says:

Not bad, but the old one from Trolltech (the T inside the Q) was better!

Qt User says:

Why not to ask all this designers and developers of brand.qt.io site to add real nice collection of icons which would be ready to easy-use in Qt-apps (for buttons, menus and everything else)? We need real stuff … this branding stuff we care really little.
I can imagine how many hours workers of Qt company will need spend more to change ALL “Qt on gree” images to “Qt on gree” images 😉 Qt-company seems like have too many resources

Mihail Naydenov says:

The new logo is horrible – color, shape, font. And I tell this as a (licensed) graphics designer myself.

The shape is extremely tired – you can see it in every cheap game/movie sci-fi GUI. “I am a rectangle, but I am cool and in motion”

The color is green was commented before me #80C342 > #3bd23d and I agree 100%. One is soft, natural (as in Nature), hence welcoming – the other is acid, it burns, not in a good way.

And the worst offender – the type

Please make your design team study the story behind the Qt name. Hell, I will tell you – quote: ” The ‘Q’ looked great on my font” (don’t remember which). Now, look the new logo, the ‘Q’ is the ugliest ‘Q’ possible.

Lastly, as already mentioned, the trolltech logo was great. I might go as far as to say it is 9/10.
Clean, simple and smart: there is the Q as overall shape, but also the ‘T’ which clearly resembles a hammer, a “tool”… a toolkit. If you want to go flat, you can’t beat this, ever. (it is not a 10 only because the ‘t’ must be lower case in general)

If you can’t make something smart like this, at least make nice to look at. The new logo is neither.

Daniel says:

Sorry, it’s horrible.

It look’s like a SIM card. Was this intentional?

The shade of green does not match the green used for the majority of the Qt assets.

The font choice is just bad.

It appears to be an attempt at the ‘flat’ paradigm that’s gradually infecting everything at the moment. But why do the other assets (such as the buttons on this blog) have drop shadows when it does not?

Mihail Naydenov says:

The transition will come in stages, I suppose. Logo just first.

Tham says:

Not a good sign if this going on, rather than putting their resources on rebranding or polish more adv which do not really help the quality of the library, they should hired more good programmers to make Qt become a better library.

If a small company like v-play can implement so many important features needed by developers, there is no reason why Digia/Qt company cannot make it.

I hope this is not a sign of “Dilbert Principle”

Mihail Naydenov says:

Thanks for making me wiki the “Dilbert Principle” and related.

On a serous note, I think it is a bit harsh and undeserved.

Rob says:

Nope, sorry. I don’t like the new logo.

Firstly, because I’m not a fan of the current flat design fad that reminds me of primitive X-Windows graphics from the 70’s and 80’s.

Secondly, the font is all wrong for the shape.

Roll-back to the previous logo please.

Ben says:

Worst logo ever – acid green, horrible font and flat…

Paul Jurczak says:

There was nothing wrong with the old Trolltech logo. There was nothing wrong with the “old” Qt logo. My guess is that you are pondering to users, who chase something new and shiny all the time. I hope you won’t alienate users, who care more about substance than pretty packaging.

I think the new design is a step back. I don’t like the rectangle with diagonal pair of corners cut off. I find it distracting.

Emanuele says:

Are you serious? Is this REALLY your new logo?

As said before by other users, it’s totally wrong and ugly: boring and anonymous shape, bad font choice, disturbing color…

Babilon says:

Sorry, but I have to concur:
* New logo is musch harder to read in favicon
* New shade of green is colder, depressing. Old one was yellowish, warm.
* I personally hate all this flat-fad. I didn’t buy 10-bit calibrated 4K monitor just to watch nice rectangles. Old logo with perspective and everything was nice to look at on its own.
* We developers don’t need nice branding from you. We want features, but most of all bug-fixes.

Yuri Alexandrov says:

“* We developers don’t need nice branding from you. We want features, but most of all bug-fixes.”

This is so true…

fbucek says:

What about instead of making new logo with terrible green color do this:

One example application which is “coded one and deployed everywhere” ( and looks nice of course )
You do not have single app which can do this. Your examples looks like the worst examples of all frameworks.

Not to mention that Qt it is not working out of the box.
Have you ever try to install Qt for the first time on fresh machine?
Try it on Windows or OSX it will not work. No information what to do!!! What to install.
http://www.qt.io/download/
Where is information what to install, to make it work??
And when you do that: It runs many many times slower then different frameworks? Why? Because your framework ( QtCreator ) runs on SINGLE core. No information why and what to do.

You are expecting that everybody know everything. Very bad attitude.

It is sad that in 20 years you were not able to make it work! But you have nice logo guideline!

Look what have you done: ( 20 years old design crap )
https://showroom.qt.io/
Examples on iTunes:
https://itunes.apple.com/us/developer/digia-plc/id300197821

Everything you do is just perfect example how not to do things!

Kai Koehne Kai Koehne says:

> Everything you do is just perfect example how not to do things!

That’s not exactly constructive feedback. I hope you’re at least feeling better now.

For the actual things you’ve been mentioning: You’re mixing up quite a few things here, and an already old blog post about our new logo is certainly not the best place to even start discussing them. Feel free to make constructive suggestions in the bug tracker, or in the mailing list.

Commenting closed.

Get started today with Qt Download now